Updated 6th of June 2016: see end of page
The Monegasque citizen, consul general of Sweden and councilor to the Monegasque Crown Mrs Patricia Husson was on the 17th of February 2010 promoted Member of first class (LNO1kl – not knight) of the Royal Order of the Polar Star.
Translation of Mr David Fristedt’s letter of 28 May 2010 to His Majesty the King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden:
His Majesty the King Carl XVI Gustaf
The Royal Palace
Kingdom of Sweden
[The present line is handwritten] Your Majesty,
Due to the recent correspondence that I have had with the Royal Court through […], who has transmitted my information to […], I have the honour to share with His Majesty the following.
I started school in Monaco in 1977 at the age of 6 but had to definitely move back to Sweden in urgency – at once – in 2004 due to the total lack of any consular help that of which I and my family were in an immediate need of.
Mrs Patricia Husson is both consul to the Kingdom of Sweden and advisor to H.S.H. Prince Albert II of Monaco.
During the Royal Couple’s last visit to Monaco, Mrs Patricia Husson were to take on even another office, notably that which consists in potentially being able to stand over the judges and prosecutors of Monaco, within its new Haut Conseil de la Magistrature [High Council of Magistracy], which saw the day on Monday the 26th of April 2010 at 12 p.m.
I find this to be completely incompatible with her Swedish office as well as with all the information provided to her since 2004.
According to a letter from Ambassador Gunnar Lund, Mrs Patricia Husson has explicitly declared that she did not deal with legal matters of a civil kind. They have forgotten that any a passport errand is of civil, legal nature.
This rimes furthermore very badly with the fact that Mrs Husson has asked my mother to take part of a criminal judgement concerning Swedish interests, just as with her possibility to exert pressure on the careers of judges and prosecutors in civil matters. However, my case is solely of a criminal nature.
It has proved itself impossible to trust the Consul with any information, given her different offices. This is why I turn myself towards His Majesty.
Given that His Majesty is awarder of the Nordtjärneordern [Royal Order of the Polar Star], and considering a scandal that I view as the biggest since 1297 due to what it implies, I see it as my duty to give His Majesty information known by the Consul since 2004. Particularly since the Monegasque bailiff against which there are laid criminal charges and an embassy not party to the residency involved have given information to the Swedish Government, and which consists of false statements of a different kind than those that were sent by late Mr Rainier Imperti, from the Monegasque equivalent of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, via Monaco’s Consul in Stockholm, Mr Olof Sjöström, in an obviously failed attempt to exert pressure on I undersigned and to cover up for the criminal actions undertaken by the Monegasque authorities.
For these reasons, I hereby attach for His Majesty that what has been sent to the Monegasque Minister of State, and what is being sent to Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt.
I furthermore see it as of the highest importance that His Majesty receive the present information, if not before the 6th of June, at least before the 19th, a day of happiness, during which international focus will be aimed at Sweden.
The idea is that the people that in one way or the other are implicated in this scandal not be able to hide from His Majesty information that because of Monaco’s actions has been able to / can be able to cause damage to the interests of the Kingdom.
With Mrs Patricia Husson’s complacency, anyone who has belongings in Monaco can lose them at anytime. This is an ongoing fact. In this case, it is a private Swedish family which has become a victim.
Another time, it can be a Swedish company which may be robbed of all its confidential documents, internet bank access codes etc. and where strangers or the authorities illegally take possession of pictures of all its belongings.
Monaco has de facto become one of Europe’s most unsafe countries, with regards to the personal and legal security. The fact that my mother had to make use of Swedish bodyguards in Monaco has obviously not been of the slightest concern to the Consul.
What happens in Monaco does not concern Sweden unless Swedes are victims there. Mrs Husson’s position is now partial, and I affirm that she has proven this clearly in practice.
The Prince’s right-hand-man, Mr Philippe Narmino, against whom a criminal charge has been laid, chief of the Red Cross in Monaco, is co-perpetrator and first responsible of the abuses of power and crimes that have been committed and that are continuous and / or continuing, which makes it impossible for me to contact H.S.H. Prince Albert II.
I really like to insist on the fact that in no way do I ask His Majesty to take a stance in any private matter, and neither do I ask His Majesty to act in any way regarding Monaco’s internal affairs of any kind. The present only constitutes information that I as a Swedish citizen consider to be my duty to convey to His Majesty, given the various offices of the Swedish Consul, apart from her business activities, and considering the receiving by Mrs Husson of the Royal Order of the Polar Star of first class[LNO1kl].
I hope to be able to communicate again with the Swedish Consulate in Monaco, without having to bother His Majesty. […].
Of course I stand at the Royal Court’s disposal in the current matter.
[…], the 28th of May 2010
Attachments : news article from Monaco Hebdo, covering the new Haut Conseil de la Magistrature, as well as letter of the 27th of May 2010 sent to the Minister of State of Monaco.
Translation of Mr David Fristedt’s letter of 2 June 2010 to His Excellency Statsminister Fredrik Reinfeldt, Prime Minister of Sweden:
Statsminister Fredrik Reinfeldt
Object: diplomatic incidents
Statsminister [Prime Minister] Reinfeldt,
This letter is only aimed for His Excellency’s information, but can later come to be followed up with a request that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs investigate the background of the criminal charges I have had to lay against some of the Monegasque authorities. The 29th of April 2005 I demanded official denials, a demand that to this day has still not been met.
In short: In 2004, Monaco’s bailiff, through her embassy in Paris, sent out false documents with untrue information that still causes damages to me and to my family.
This bailiff is subjected to several laid charges for aggravated crimes, among others for having participated in the fabrication of authorities’ documents (faux en écriture publique commis par des officiers ministériels publics).
On the 8th of December 2004, the Swedish embassy in Paris sent the forgeries to the [Swedish] Government’s office, its section for crime related issues and international legal cooperation (BIRS)[Regeringskansliet, enheten för brottmålsärenden och internationellt rättsligt samarbete (BIRS)], which in turn sent me the consignment with acknowledgement of receipt to my Swedish address with demand that I sign the documents. I received these on the 29th of December 2004.
This would have been a normal procedure, maybe, had it not been for the fact that Monaco’s bailiff wasn’t by any means entitled to send out these documents. Indeed, the person on whose behalf she acted for lived in France, notwithstanding what it falsely states in the “Récipissé” that the Swedish Government’s office received, namely that the person had her address in Monaco.
It is with premeditation that the bailiff has written an erroneous address in order to seem habilitated to be in charge of the matter. The bailiff, along with her husband and the latter’s silent partner, in en envoy on the 26th of January 2005 via Monaco’s equivalent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and their consul Mr Olof Sjöström in Stockholm, furthermore were to baptize their conscious error an “IT-bug”.
The envoy that the Government’s office communicated to me contained, among other things, a threat to take all my goods if I didn’t pay 12.000 Euros within 48 hours to an unknown account, or send the money directly to the bailiff. By breaking and entering my mother’s apartment, it was instead her goods that were to become confiscated or stolen by the silent partner. At least we know that the jewellery from among others Hovjuvelerare [Crown Jeweler] Bolin disappeared, probably with the bailiff’s complacency. As a result, both the police and the prosecution became paralyzed (see www.bimcam.com ).
So Monaco’s incriminated bailiff and a non entitled embassy have given the Swedish Government – among other things – false statements of a different kind than those which later were to be sent to me by late Rainier Imperti of the Monegasque equivalent of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, via Monaco’s consul in Stockholm, Mr Olof Sjöström, in an obviously failed attempt to exert pressure on I undersigned in order to cover up for criminal activities committed by the Monegasque authorities.
I hope now that the Minister of State of the Principality of Monaco, His Excellency Mr Michel Roger, with his substantial, legal background, will be able to remedy to that for which Monaco bears responsibility.
I have chosen to send His Excellency the same documents that have been received by His Majesty the King Carl XVI Gustaf in his quality as awarder of the Order of the Royal Polar Star, containing the same material as that sent the other day to His Excellency’s colleague in Monaco.
[…], the 2nd of June 2010
Additional information of 19 September 2011 due to new events of August 2011:
August is for sure the most quiet month in Monaco, regarding jurisdictional activities, since most law firms and the consulates are closed during the judicial holidays. This means that anyone in need of help due to offences such as burglary, thefts, illegal confiscations etc. can find him/herself devoid of any help in this country, so well known for its security.
It is perfectly established that some malicious swindlers take advantage of this situation.
It has just recently been learnt that the consulate very well may be active even during the month of August if the consul deems an issue sufficiently important.
Indeed, during August 2011, according to a police source, the consul has contacted Monaco’s chief prosecutor Mr Dréno on the issue of the part she herself has played in the ongoing affairs.
More information on this new turn of events will follow soon.
The reply to the following letter of 2004 stated, however, that the Consul was away on a cruise on a private yacht and that she under no circumstance were to be bothered.
Extracts from the letter of 9 August 2004 to Mrs Patricia Husson:
Translation from the original French letter.
6 Lacets Saint-Léon
Temporary address : […]
Fax : […]
Att: The Swedish Consul, Mrs Patricia Husson
The Swedish Consulate
Fax: +377 97972268
Exp: Monica Fristedt
Date: 8 August 2004
Pages in all: 16 (sixteen)
I write to you concerning a scandalous incident that has happened to me in Monaco, and I am in need of your help in emergency.
The facts are the following:
I own two apartments and am renting another one, a studio.
My problems pertain to the studio situated in the Bloc A, 12th floor, Château Périgord 1 (see attached extracts of the lease).
I have been thrown out of the apartment of which I am the tenant without my name figuring in any court order whatsoever and my belongings have been confiscated without any court order to this effect and have been given to other people.
All my personal, confidential and sensible effects are in that studio.
On the 27th of July, the concierge tells me that a person wants to enter my studio with a locksmith!
I immediately walk down, to find [the convicted swindler], a locksmith and a person that did not want to present herself but who says she is a bailiff and that she has a judge’s ordinance stating that [the convicted swindler] has the right to live alone in my apartment!
I try to explain that it is a mistake ; I live in that studio, and almost everything in it are my personal belongings ; I also demand a copy of the ordinance, but she refuses to give it to me ! She gives me one minute to read the text and I don’t understand anything! I call the police, which came, only to tell me that it cannot do anything about this bailiff, showing very (too) briefly this ordinance, one we know now, doesn’t concern me!
This ordinance can only have been obtained through false statements, knowing that [the convicted swindler] is in possession of neither a lease, nor an accommodation agreement pertaining to said apartment, something that is very easy to verify for whom it may concern.
I have really tried all means in order to access my rights, but in vain (see attached documents).
I would appreciate your making the necessary to put an end to this scandalous situation, one which is as unbearable as intolerable.
[…] 9 August 2004
Extract of the lease
Criminal complaint to the Direction of the Public Safety (Police) of 7 August
Criminal complaint signed David Fristedt, Chief Prosecutor
Certificate of accomodation of 2 June 2003 and annulment of said accommodation for [the convicted swindler]
David Fristedt’s affidavit 4 August 2004
Letter to the Government’s Councillor for Domestic Affairs, 3 August
Letter to Mr the President of the Court of first instance, 31 July
Letter to lawyer Sbarrato of 29 July
The [illegal] ordinance of the first Vice-president of the Court of First Instance that concerned David Fristedt 21 July
Swedish national day, 6th of June 2012
Last 23rd of May 2012, the Swedish Administrative Supreme Court, within its protocol of affair 1226-12, confirms the judgement of Stockholm’s Administrative Appeals Court of the 8th of February 2012, seized by Mr David Fristedt in order to be able to confirm the content without doubt whatsoever of his official criminal complaint of last 7th of December 2011 against notably Patricia Husson. From this emerges a new international affair, as a direct consequence baptized the Husson-Malbrancke-Affair, which constitutes a repetition (reiteration) of the Staples, marker pen and IT-bug Affair.
Patricia Husson is hence officially considered suspect number one in the Affair, from the beginning, according to the information brought by the Monegasque and the Swedish police.
The Swedish Embassy in Paris confirms in writing that Husson has acted alone, during the summer holidays of 2011.
The Husson-Malbrancke-Affair is on this Swedish national day on the Swedish prime minister’s desk, Statsminister Fredrik Reinfeldt, as far as the Swedish consulate in Monaco is concerned. Patricia Husson’s responsibilities as Councillor to the Monegasque Crown are on the desk of Monaco’s Chief Prosecutor Mr Jean-Pierre DRENO.
The Affair features an official letter to Mr Malbrancke, juge d’instruction in Monaco since lately. It is signed by victim Monica Fristedt, and ends as follows:
“Fearing since for my security in Monaco, I do not dare to set my foot there any longer.
Minister of State Michel ROGER’s recent letter became bearer of so grave consequences that because of it, despite having resided in Monaco since 1977, I no longer do.”
Patricia Husson and Michel Roger during the Swedish national day 2011 : http://www.achm.mc/6-juin-2011-le-consul-general-de-suede-offre-une-reception-en-lhonneur-de-la-fete-nationale-suedoise/
Update 16th of December 2012
Pending indictment of a State-sponsored organized gang* and thanks to Patricia HUSSON’s confessions, confirmed by Sweden’s Administrative Supreme Court, this is in short what happened during the summer of 2011, and what goes on.
Patricia HUSSON and elements of said organized gang were to lie to the Monegasque as well as to the Swedish authorities in order to obtain an illegal police interview with David Fristedt herewith DF in Sweden, during the fall of 2011: See the complaint below of the 7th of December 2011. DF immediately alerted the Swedish police of the plot.
This complaint is official and of public interest.
* Important judicial term in view of GRECO’s latest report.
Criminal complaint of the 7th of December 2011 to Mr Chef Prosecutor Jean-Pierre DRENO in personam
Her are some extracts of the complaint:
Object: Re: my envoy dated 6th of June 2011; criminal complaints against Mrs the Crown Councillor of Monaco Patricia HUSSON; criminal complaints against Mr the Director of Judicial Services Philippe NARMINO; criminal complaints against Mr Jacques RAYBAUD, ex-Chief Prosecutor (highest ranked prosecutor) of Monaco; criminal complaints against X (unnamed party, in the singular or in the plural); legal repetitions (reiterations); criminal complaints pending an envoy LR/AR with added information of retroactive effect; art. 279 & 137 of the Monegasque criminal Code; State affairs; concentrated information jotted down in a haste before an LR/AR file with retroactive effect.
Mister Chief Prosecutor [Jean-Pierre DRENO],
Last 4th of November, 2011, I learned from the Swedish Police that some key people put into question within the Staples, marker pen and IT-Bug Affair, Mrs Patricia Husson, Councillor to the Crown in Monaco and alleged general consul of the Kingdom of Sweden (her boss in Paris being “merely” a consul), Mr Philippe Narmino, Director of Judicial Services etc. and the ex-Chief Prosecutor Mr Jacques Raybaud were to have filed – so it seems – criminal charges through a non signed piece of paper against I undersigned, for actions that I would have committed in Monaco.
I henceforth file criminal complaint(s) for false statements toward a judge, and consequently toward the authorities of a foreign country for falsely having stated that I were to have been in Monaco during the period of time at stake in the complaints, a sine qua non condition for Monaco to be competent ratione loci for all [“Threat of prosecution” (hot om åtal)] charges whatsoever against my person.
I also file a criminal complaint against the already incriminated Philippe Narmino, for having acted as a minister of justice within the contact with a Ministry of Justice of a foreign country, a ministry of which the head is Prime Minister.
I also file a criminal complaint against said Jacques Raybaud for professional fault consisting in that of showing a criminal complaint – sent to him – to one of the incriminated persons, another sine qua non condition for any alleged insult to have been experienced by X in the plural. I also file a criminal complaint against said Raybaud within the scope of article 279 of the criminal Code
Mr the fourth Chief prosecutor of the present affairs Jean-Pierre DRENO has evidently failed to put an end to the public disorders on an international scale, as prove the seven illegal summons to DF and his mother with same file numbers signed Évelyne UHTIO, on behalf – supposedly – of Loïc MALBRANCKE, after the criminal complaint, as the highest Swedish authorities know. This is something that the Swedish Administrative Supreme Court has not been judging, limiting itself to the facts of 2011.
In order to pursue her clumsy, criminal moves, Patricia HUSSON used – once again during the month of August, and as foreseen by DF – the help of NARMINO, who appointed an instruction judge ad hoc (Loïc MALBRANCKE), placed under the incriminated Brigitte Grinda GAMBARINI (since recently and to no one’s surprise appointed president of the Court of appeal) in order to act against Mr Fristedt, incriminating him on the most foolish of grounds, devoid of common sense and legal jurisdiction in even geographic terms (ratione loci). As the interested reader can see, this time, it is Narmino AND Michel ROGER, who appointed said lawyer, Malbrancke, in order for them to use him for their own protection.
This is a decree by former President of the French Republic, Nicolas SARKOZY, signed in the middle of the judicial holidays:
It concerns the nomination of an instruction judge through means of Philippe NARMINO and Michel ROGER:
The dates (22nd of July vs. 24th of August), demonstrate that Monaco did not care to wait for the Presidential decree.
Indeed, MALBRANCKE took office on the 1rst of September 2011, but incriminated Patricia HUSSON’s evident and confirmed (as foreseen in 2010, see letter to His Majesty the King above) use of power over the judiciary started earlier (as confirmed by the Monegasque Police.)
On the 26th of August 2011, DF wrote the following urgent e-mail to the Swedish Embassy in Paris:
Avseende gårdagens begäran om att få ta del av eventuell polisanmälan som Sveriges generalkonsul i Monaco Patricia Husson och tillika Prins Albert II:s rådgiverska sägs ha gjort emot mig så vill jag såsom idag under arbetstid – p.g.a. viss polisinspektörs kommande mammaledighet från och med dagens slut – ta del av all information som Ambassaden har i ärendet, alternativt få besked om att Ambassaden tvärtom saknar information i ärendet.
Translation of main text: :
“Due to yesterday’s request of taking part of an allegedly filed police complaint that Sweden’s general consul in Monaco Patricia Husson and as such also Prince Albert II:s councillor is said to have orchestrated against me I thus want as per this very day, during working hours – due to a certain police officer’s imminent maternity leave – and from the day’s ending, to take part of all information that the Embassy has in the matter; alternatively to get confirmation – on the contrary – as to the fact that the Embassy lacks such information.”
Three minutes later, the embassy (not the ambassador) replied with the following e-mail:
Hej igen David,
vi har saknar information i ärendet och kommer att söka Patricia i nästa vecka då konsultatet åter öppnar.
Mvh och trevlig helg
Translation of main text, error included :
“We have lack information in the matter and will seek Patricia next week, when the consulate again opens.”
This would prove that the Swedish Embassy had no idea of what Patricia HUSSON had been up to regarding her criminal ways and intent, and proves that it would contact her as soon as the consulate were to reopen.
Considering the increasing threats, however, Ambassador Gunnar LUND – who has never denied the facts – was given the opportunity to answer a few questions personally, less they be forwarded officially to His Excellency Prime Minister Fredrik REINFELDT. Unfortunately and to crown it all, it is thus by Ambassador LUND’s own volition that the following questions have been forwarded to Sweden’s Prime Minister:
“ […] Ambassador Gunnar Lund,
The 5th of March 2012 I wrote to the Administrative Supreme Court in Sweden for help in order for my being able to qualify the degree of suspicion of crime(s) that in Monaco best fits Patricia Husson’s flagrant lies against two countries’ authorities.
She seems to take it all upon herself since 2004 and puts Monaco’s consulate [in Sweden] back up against the wall, just as she drags you and your predecessor, cabinet secretary Frank Belfrage, in.
I hereby whish for You to swiftly answer the following questions, in order for my not having to take these up in my letter to Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, […]
What do you know about the false attempts and actions regarding Husson’s false claims and her filed police complaint?
What do you know about the time between the 2nd and 17th of February 2005 (see the official letter from Monica Fristedt and on www.bimcam.com, topic #10)?
What measures have you undertaken in order to have the threats against not least myself stopped?
[…] Are You inclined to distance Yourself from and condemn Husson’s criminal actions/obstructions? Or do you, also, stand behind the forgeries with libel against my mother?
If not so, do You then distance Yourself from Monaco’s consulate’s criminal actions/obstructions? […]”
David Fristedt has been invited in writing by the Swedish “Police of the Polices” (Riksenheten för polismål) to harvest further information in order for it to open a criminal investigation.
The harvest – so far – seems successful.
DF did not believe the Swedish police. As a result, he launched a never before seen swift investigation, that prompted the Swedish Administrative Supreme Court to confirm that some at the international prosecution’s office in Sweden “merely” act as messengers for Monaco. In this particular case, this comes down to the very definition of corruption, one which said Court has not been asked to deal with, since not pertaining to its field of competence.
Besides, the hallucinating and thus interesting decision of Sweden’s Administrative Supreme Court leaves the door open to a parliamentary hearing in Sweden (KU-förhör), with two successive prime ministers. Is protecting Patricia HUSSON really worth it? Now that she has been caught red handed?
The Swedes are hardly close to forget the last time a Swedish ambassador in Paris was summoned before said hearing :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a30ysyyuGLE. The swindler is directly related to said hearing. Is Ambassador Gunnar LUND that keen on taking his historic place?
Considering DRENO’s inaction consisting in putting an end to the public disorders, here is an official letter signed DF:s mother:
Translation of the official letter in French to the Juge d’Instruction in Monaco Mr Loïc Malbrancke of 14 February 2012 from DF.s mother.
Monsieur le Juge,
Be it said hereby and once and for all, that in no way shall I accept further disturbances due to the actions or inactions of Mrs the Monegasque Crown Councellor and Consul to Sweden in Monaco Patricia HUSSON (herewith Husson). She will be held responsible for whatever she has launched.
I shall in no way accept any presure from Your part, nor during the Swedish inquiry, nor during the Monegasque one.
Needless to say that I shall not accept any other threats from Husson or by anyone else. Your three summons finally got to me in the United Kingdom. These have unfortunately been viewed, by I undersigned as well as by many another lawyer as constituting no less than attempt of pressure on witness in ongoing matters within which I am a civil party to the ongoing process, and this reverberates ever so badly. […]”
Another official letter was unfortunately called for, two days after the Swedish National Day of 2012 in light of DRENOS’s lack of action.
London 8 June 2012
Official letter to Cabinet d’Instruction
Le Greffier Evelyne Uhtio
I write to you in English since it is easier for me.
Concerning the different convocations you have sent to my address in Monaco, I first of all want to inform you once for all, that you should know by now that I, since soon one year , no longer is resident in Monaco .( I have sent back my “carte privilégié” to the Police in Monaco.)
As far as I know , it is the Swedish Consul Mrs. Patricia Husson who has initiated the recent convocations. I can see they have the same number as the one recently sent to Mr. David Fristedt in Sweden . The Police told me last summer that it is Mrs. Husson who is behind this new threat and I am now 100 percent convinced,since my son got an answer from the High Aministrative Court in Sweden where they confirm what the Police already had told David.
Mrs. Hussons involvement in this affair is on the table of the Chief Prosecutor.
In the mean time, notice has been taken of Monaco’s chief prosecutor Jean-Pierre DRENO’s lack of enthusiasm for getting a French version of the for the authorities ever so embarrassing 69 [sixty nine] pages long transcription of the Swedish police interview.
Here is an extract of the Sunday Times’ issue of the 3rd of July 2011, presented in original to the Swedish police, thanks to Councillor of the Monegasque Crown Patricia HUSSON’s extremely foolish initiatives:
“Organised crime is not the only dark side of the story. Sinister abuses are perpetrated by the government, too, and with impunity. As the wedding celebrations got under way yesterday, Geza Honti, a 78-year- old retired German eye doctor, sat on a bench overlooking the bay.
He came to Monaco years ago to live in his mother’s apartment. Like so many other foreigners — including Britons such as Sir Roger Moore, the actor, and Sir Philip Green, the businessman — he was attracted by the zero tax rate. On top of that the weather was good and, with a policeman on every street corner, crime was almost nonexistent.
What happened to Honti in 2006 is reminiscent of the worst excesses of the Soviet Union. A bailiff and several other officials arrived on his doorstep demanding that he vacate his flat so the authorities could conduct an inventory of his possessions.
When he questioned the order, apparently the result of a complaint about a cluttered balcony, he claims he was injected with a sedative and held against his will on a psychiatric wing of the Princess Grace hospital. He was allowed home later to find that his flat had been emptied.
“I had about five kilos of gold coins, there were paintings, a lot of carpets but, you know, the most precious thing they took were my photographs and documents and books. It’s incredible. Apparently I’ll never get them back,” he said.
According to Patrick Anhoury, an estate agent and friend, Honti had committed no offence beyond occasionally berating acquaintances about the evils of smoking and eating too much garlic.
Eccentric behaviour is no crime and, in Anhoury’s view, Honti is the victim of a criminal judicial system. “In Monaco,” Anhoury said, “there are these lists circulating of elderly well-off people who are alone and vulnerable and who can be stripped of their assets by abusive procedures.”
Anhoury was speaking on the telephone from Lebanon. He had fled there after being informed that he was in danger of arrest for writing an “insulting” letter to Narmino in which he accused the minister of abuse of power for authorising Honti’s hospitalisation.
Apparently the case is not isolated. Monica Fristedt, a Swedish resident, complained that jewels and other valuables had been stolen from her flat by an intruder working in cahoots with government officials in 2004. She has been waging a legal battle to get them back.
The palace declined to answer questions about these cases last week. Narmino continues to deny any wrongdoing. But the question of whether elderly rich people can live safely in their penthouse apartments is as important to Monaco’s future as its promise not to tax them. […]
On the backside of medals, and on a positive indication, notable is the current President of the French Republic François HOLLANDE’s recent decision to strip a non national from the Legion of Honor.
Sweden voted for Monaco to become a member of the European Council. Greece, democacy’s cradle, voted against it. It’s all in its honor. Sweden is now in its own right to ask Monaco to fulfill its obligations.
Here is an example of Monaco’s failure to comply with its obligations towards the European Council:
When DF called Monaco’s chief prosecutor’s office in 2012, DF was put on hold.
This is what the music spells out when one calls the judiciary, regarding a criminal complaint against the Minister of State, Michel ROGER:
“[music] Hello um, you are indeed in relation with the Ministry of State : we shall endeavour to lessen your waiting time, and shall commit to connect your call, as soon as possible [music]…”
Whilst a woman who doesn’t present herself but whose voice DF believes to have identified answers, this is what follows:
DF: “I am in connection with the Chief Prosecutor’s [Dreno’s] office, right?”
The woman: “Indeed, yes Sir!”
The separation of powers is obviously still absent from Monaco’s agenda – note to the Council of Europe.
On Patricia HUSSON, it is moreover advisable to consider the following:
Patricia HUSSON gave the Swedish police her own Swedish version of the DF’s original letter sent to His Majesty the King Carl XVI Gustaf. Only the original signed DF is to be taken into consideration. She has not asked DF for it, nor His Majesty. This warrants hence the reproduction of said original.
Here is the original letter (Swedish):
In December 2012, BIMCAM learns about new facts, and in a spectacular way.
Concentrated update 7th of January 2013
PATRICIA HUSSON SIDES WITH INITIAL BLACKMAILER AND MAKES USE AS FORESEEN OF HER POWER OVER THE JUDICIARY; SHAMEFULLY DRAGS IN SWEDEN THROUGH FALSE STATEMENTS; THE STAPLES, MARKER PEN AND IT-BUG AFFAIR RESOLVED.
Update of 9 March 2013, to be completed.
E-mail to email@example.com from the Swedish Embassy in Paris, at 09:09 AM CET (GMT+1) on the 29th of January 2013 to the editor and publisher of BIMCAM:
Palais de Justice i Monaco har meddelat att man inte informerar om när en rättegång äger rum.
Det rör sig om konfidentiell information som man inte lämnar ut.
Translation of main text by the publisher and editor of BIMCAM:
Palais de Justice in Monaco has informed that it does not communicate the time for a trial to take place.
It is pursuant to confidential information that isn’t to be publically known.”
This information has been confirmed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (UD).
CLUB 137: PATRICIA HUSSON’S FORGERY TO THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE OF THE KINGDOM OF SWEDEN OF THE LETTER TO HIS MAJESTY THE KING, AS CONVEYED BY THE SWEDISH POLICE ON THE 8th OF JANUARY 2013 INTO HANDS.
Original: “[…] så fick Patricia Husson ytterligare befogenheter, nämligen den att potentiellt stå över domare och åklagare i Monaco, enligt Monacos nya Haut Conseil de la Magistrature.”
(”Mrs Patricia Husson were to take on even another office, notably that which consists in potentially being able to stand over the judges and prosecutors of Monaco, within its new Haut Conseil de la Magistrature [High Council of Magistracy].”)
FORGERY: ”Patricia Husson skulle tillträda mera funktioner, I dessa kunna vara över domare och åklagare i Monaco, I det Högsta Rådet av Rättsväsendet…”
Could mean: “Patricia Husson were to access even more functions within these being able above judge(s) and prosecutor(s) in Monaco, In the Highest Justice as such…”
Original: ”Tanken är att de som på något sätt är inblandade i denna skandal i Monaco inte skall kunna undanhålla Hans Majestät information som genom Monacos agerande kommit och / eller kan komma att skada Rikets Intressen.”
(”The idea is that the people that in one way or the other are implicated in this scandal not be able to hide from His Majesty information that because of Monaco’s actions has been able to / can be able to cause damage to the interests of the Kingdom.”)
FORGERY: ”Tanken är att människor som på ett eller annat sätt är inblandade i denna skandal inte ska kunna tillbaka hålla information inför Hans Majestät genom insatser från Monaco som har / kan skada intressen från USA…”
Comment : This does not constitute a typing or translation error, but rather a forgery with criminal intent.
Could mean : « The idea that some human beings that in one way or the other are involved in this scandal not be able to withhold information before His Majesty through actions from Monaco who / which has / can harm interests from the USA /to the detriment of USA [United States of America].
Original: ”Med Patricia Hussons goda minne kan den som har egendom i Monaco närhelst bli av med den. Det är ett pågående faktum. I förevarande fall är det en svensk privat familj som har drabbats.”
(“With Mrs Patricia Husson’s complacency, anyone who has belongings in Monaco can lose them at anytime. This is an ongoing fact. In this case, it is a private Swedish family which has become a victim.”)
FORGERY: ”Med självbelåtenhet av Patricia Husson, med innehav av privat egendom i Monaco. Det är ett konstant faktum. I detta fall är det en privat svenskt familjeföretag som har lidit…”
Could mean : “With Patricia Husson’s self-satisfaction, with ownership of private property in Monaco. This is a constant fact. In this case it is a private family company that has suffered…”
Original: ”En annan gång kan det gälla ett svenskt företag som blir av med sina konfidentiella dokument, internetbankkoder osv och där främlingar eller myndigheter olagligen får tillgång till foton av alla dess tillgångar.”
(“Another time, it can be a Swedish company which may be robbed of all its confidential documents, internet bank access codes etc. and where strangers or the authorities illegally take possession of pictures of all its belongings.”)
FORGERY: ”En annan gång är det ett svenskt företag som kan bedrägligt kringgå alla konfidentiella dokument, internetbank åtkomst kod etc och där främlingar eller myndigheter beslagtar olagligt foton av all hennes egendom.”
Comment: Patricia Husson has wanted and wants to have the Kingdom of Sweden’s Ministry of Justice to believe that DF, in his letter to His Majesty the King, were to have put into question Swedish companies in Monaco to the detriment of the incriminated Husson.
Could mean : “Another time, it’s a Swedish company which through means of swindling ought to get around any confidential documents, the bank internet accèss code etc and where aliens or authorities would confiscate – illegally – Patricia Husson’s [!] goods.”
Original: “Förevarande utgör enkom information som jag anser det vara min plikt att som svensk medborgare meddela Hans Majestät, med tanke på de olika ämbeten Sveriges Konsul i Monaco innehar utöver hennes affärsverksamhet, och beaktat Madame Hussons erhållande av Nordstjärneorden av första klass.”
(“The present only constitutes information that I as a Swedish citizen consider to be my duty to convey to His Majesty, given the various offices of the Swedish Consul, apart from her business activities, and considering the receiving by Mrs Husson of the Royal Order of the Polar Star of first class [LNO1kl].”)
FORGERY: “Detta är information som jag anser som svensk medborgare är det min plikt att Hennes Majestät med tanke på de olika funktionerna som svensk konsul i Monaco bortom sin verksamhet, och med tanke på Patricia Hussons mottagande av Nordstjärneordens första klass…”
Comment: DF has never written to Her Majesty the Queen. For Patricia Husson to falsely claim otherwise to the Swedish Authorities is both shameful and disgraceful. Lying officially is apparently a second nature of Husson’s. For accurate information on Monaco, the Swedish Authorities are therefore invited to go through BIMCAM only, as long as Patricia Husson remains consul. Indeed, the Swedish Authorities have been fooled for nine years now, in the ongoing blackmail.
Could mean: “This is information that I as a Swedish citizen find it is my duty that Her Majesty [The Queen] considering the different functions as Swedish consul in Monaco beyond its [her] activity, considering the reception in first class by Patricia Husson of the Nordstjärneordens first class…”
Next proof of forgeries, that of instruction judge Loïc Malbrancke, confirmed in writing by the Chief Prosecutor of the Kingdom of Sweden.
Update 27 February 2014
Resolved Affair HUSSON-MALBRANCKE (Cf. supra)
Nota bene: For a reminder of the content of the last paragraph of article 137 of the Monegasque Criminal Code, scroll up to the complaint of the 7th of December 2011.
THE PROSECUTOR GENERAL OF SWEDEN (RIKSÅKLAGAREN) BRINGS PERFECT PROOF IN WRITING, AGAINST MONACO’S INSTRUCTION JUDGE LOÏC MALBRANCKE’S FALSE STATEMENTS.
In the Swedish letter to His Majesty the King of Sweden, in its original version, is being stressed Patricia HUSSON’s very power over the Monegasque Judiciary. In light of this obvious understatement, and of all the information that she has gotten, now known to many another including H.M. the King, and publishable by BIMCAM at anytime, one might assume that HUSSON would think twice. No, no, no. This is the first time in her life that someone puts her in her place, and that has rocked her off balance completely. Under topic 15, BIMCAM shall explain in due time how far she can maliciously use / misuse her power, including that – provided by the Monegasque Constitution – of firing and / or replacing the chief of State, Prince Albert II.
At present, her de facto powers consist (as totally foreseen by BIMCAM) in illegally giving orders to the Swedish Police, its International Prosecution Office as well as to staff within the Swedish Government, equally identified, since 2004. Indeed, Patricia HUSSON continues to sweep the floor with people working not least at the Swedish Foreign Ministry[UD], including Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr Carl BILDT.
Ironically enough, Prime Minister REINFELDT has in writing recently asked David Fristedt for help. Here is hence a first aid, during this election year anno 2014: get rid of some really bad advisors in the diplomatic sphere! Patricia HUSSON is first in line. More well needed advice is on the way, as requested.
On the 18th of December 2012, DF called the Chief Prosecutor in Sweden (Riksåklagaren, RÅ) to have him deny the ever so viciously and criminally false, official and international allegations consisting in writing that DF were to have been prosecuted in Sweden.
Despite that DF had received these false allegations signed by MALBRANCKE and sent out by the Consul of Norway, Bailiff Claire NOTARI just before Christmas, yet another umpteenth, humiliating procedure for the Swedish Police started all over once again: on the 8th of January 2013, a policeman came driving his car out in the sleet and the snow and at an erroneous address to ask DF – always warned in advance and who had forewarned witnesses ad hoc to come and watch – to sign a sealed letter, which later showed to be almost identical as the one that had been sent by ordinary mail in December 2012, to the correct address. DF who since 2004 was familiar with their insane habit of sending the same kind of documents through as many authority channels possible, signed the reception of said sealed letter.
This time the letter was sent by Statsminister REINFELDT’s Swedish staff, upon secret orders from Monaco, and by Consul Patricia HUSSON, acting in the name of Sweden.
Once the letter opened, one could read the incriminated MALBRANCKE’s by then already internationally known false statement, as confirmed and provided ONE DAY EARLIER by the Kingdom of Sweden’s highest ranked prosecutor, RIKSÅKLAGAREN.
The poor policeman probably did not realize the extent of the plot at the time and how fooled he was. And by all means, the letter of his supreme boss [RÅ] in hindsight, he should be glad that his name is not being published here.
During the fall of 2013, proof has been gathered as to demonstrate that the contents of the letter had been tempered with by several individuals working secretly for NARMINO and the Club 137, both in Monaco and in Sweden. Needless to say, Prime Minister REINFELDT needs to urgently regain control of His Office.
The alarming level of the charges laid continuously against incriminated Loïc MALBRANCKE must be dealt with immediately, since it concerns anyone in the world, even people who have never been in contact with Monaco whatsoever.
The sole suspicion of being or having been even remotely connected to someone around the world that would have dared criticize the advisors of Albert II of Monaco or “His State” is apparently enough for anyone to be arrested.
Because of Monaco, and perhaps of Sweden, Patricia HUSSON and Philippe NARMINO have been able to at least in practice – albeit illegally – use instruction judge Loïc MALBRANCKE to forge (fake) criminal records on an international scale, against people who are strangers to Monaco, both in terms of residency as well as regarding citizenship. This precedent of tempering with civil statuses and criminal records internationally must be thwarted at all costs.
Modus operandi: HUSSON, MALBRANCKE & C:o falsely state to foreign countries’ judicial AND executive authorities that such or such person has been prosecuted in Monaco, whereas – at the same time – they spread false information in Monaco consisting in these same people having been prosecuted in their respective countries. All with criminal intent [uppsåt] in order to cover up for their own crimes, and to criminally justify international legal assistance and cooperation in view of silencing critical voices.
LEX BIMCAM : anyone considering traveling to Monaco is herewith seriously invited to contact their own country’s prosecution’s office in order to get a certified copy of their true criminal record (blank or not). Indeed,MONACO has proven that it lies about foreigners’ criminal records. This can have ever so serious repercussions for all, since anyone could be met at the customs of a foreign country with an arrest warrant based on fake information, not least considering Monaco’s latest connections, such as and for example those with Quatar and Russia.
In this case, the false information provided by Loïc MALBRANCKE was necessary to issue illegal arrest warrants(albeit national ones) against people who did not live whatsoever in Monaco, since an instruction judge was not warranted in the first place, according to the low level of charges, however fabricated by HUSSON, and shamefully so in the name of the Kingdom of Sweden. Such false information has been posted on the Town Hall’s walls in Monaco. This trademark of NARMINO’s is a common, continuous and / or continuing way of proceeding and this consists likewise in continuous and / or continuing damages that Monaco shall pay for.
In clear, and as DRENO was informed of in December 2012, with copy to the Swedish Royal Court, HUSSON’s illegal actions IN THE NAME OF SWEDEN mean that any a family member or friend or acquaintance of a Swedish editor and publisher might find itself surprisingly arrested in Monaco (and perhaps elsewhere too!), by the orders of their own consul, who works for Monaco.
The difference, as opposed to Carl BILDT’s silent diplomacy regarding retrieving imprisoned journalists from abroad is that in this case, it is THE SELF-INCRIMINATED CONSUL WORKING FOR THE OTHER STATE THAT HAS THE ARREST WARRANTS ISSUED. An unheard of situation, and yet another reason to scroll back to the letter to His Majesty.
The removal of the diplomatic immunity of former Swedish ambassador to the United States Gunnar LUND, now ambassador of Sweden in Paris and responsible for implicating the Swedish Prime Minister (see above) is being called for, and ought to be currently undertaken. When his own staff in Paris speaks to BIMCAM under anonymity out of fear, LUND’s silence becomes a serious issue. To pretend that trials in Monaco are secret and confidential, with a subordinate of his, Consul HUSSON, being the instigator of this mad helter-skelter is nothing but diplomatic nonsense at its worst.
BIMCAM has been asked to write a book about this incredible story which became State Affairs as early as in 2004, and discussions have already been undertaken as to who will write the script for a movie. Meanwhile, the reader can view this Danish trailer, of concern to Patricia HUSSON’s businesses and to Gunnar LUND
BIMCAM hopes to avoid future headlines like the following in the future:
Expressen’s poster of the 24th of April 2010 was the result of the Royal Court not listening to prior warnings, not least in writing, to stay away from Monaco during the current nasty period in Monaco’s history, one that began about ten years ago when the late Prince Rainier III became too weak to keep control over the worst elements.
However and for good reasons, produced not least before the Swedish Royal Court in personam, and considering the legal implications of the definitive, latest decision of Sweden’s Administrative Supreme Court, Högsta Förvaltningsdomstolen, within its foreseen and current repercussions, BIMCAM hopes to avoid future headlines like this in the future.
But if kings, princes and prime ministers surround themselves with the worst of advisors it can be difficult to avoid an escalation of this kind of headlines. In this regard it may be pertinent to underline that Sweden’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, its King and its Prime Minister at different times have used the same female advisor, a woman with unique and – as BIMCAM can demonstrate – intolerable insight behind the scenes of power. On the other hand, this seems not to have been very wise in terms of goodwill for any of the three gentlemen. Perhaps is it rather Patricia HUSSON who has benifited from this constellation.
Update of the 27th of March 2015 due to new events
ARTICLE 77 OF THE MONEGASQUE CONSTITUTION
“Art.77.- The Crown Council may be consulted by the Prince on matters regarding the superior interests of the State. It can present suggestions to the Prince.
It is mandatory for it to be consulted on the following issues: international treaties, dissolution of the State Council [i.e. a Monaco’s very own version of parliament – BIMCAM’s note], demands for citizenship and for reintegration, pardon and amnesty (bold letters and translation by www.bimcam.com).”
Update of the 6th of June 2015, Sweden’s national day.
The Swedish embassy in Paris has in writing communicated its stance over Patricia Husson.
As a result, BIMCAM has informed the Swedish Governmnet of the filing of a criminal complaint against said justiciable.
Crimes against the security of the Swedish State are at most punishable by life emprisonment.
The Affair is of both political and military nature.
Update of the 6th of June 2016, Sweden´s national day
A Swedish consul´s abuse of power that lead to corruption
An example of the Swedish and the Norwegian consuls working together using their unlawful influence over the Swedish Judiciary. Indeed , the only solution of for the prevention of a Swedish Governmental crisis is the removal of Patricia Husson as a representative for Sweden. Swedish civil and military secret services are being briefed in the matter.
”Aktörer som Säkerhetspolisen följer
Vi följer och bedömer aktörer som använder våld, hot och trakasserier för att påverka beslutsfattandet, hindra myndighetsutövningen eller inskränka den fria debatten och som gör det för att de vill förändra samhället, ändra vårt styrelseskick eller kunna fortsätta tjäna pengar på sin kriminella verksamhet.
Ett samlingsnamn för detta är otillåten påverkan. Det rör sig både om aktörer som är politiskt motiverade och som drivs av ekonomiska intressen, alltså både politiskt motiverade aktörer i extremistmiljöerna och aktörer inom den grova organiserade brottsligheten.
I begreppet otillåten påverkan ingår också korruption, det vill säga när förtroendevalda eller myndighetsföreträdare inom ramen för sitt uppdrag eller sin yrkesutövning begår brott eller tjänstefel för att vara kriminella aktörer behjälpliga.” Source: SÄPO http://www.sakerhetspolisen.se/forfattningsskydd/aktorer-sakerhetspolisen-foljer.html
Brief reminder: Sweden’s Administrative Supreme Court is BIMCAM’s witness as to the application of article 137 of the Monegasque criminal Code regarding complaints in Monaco against Patricia HUSSON, and to that anyone trying to interfere with the ongoing investigations falls under the scope of said Code’s article 279.
Under BIMCAM:s topic 14, one can read the following:
“1281.- “[…] in order for a fire to occur, one needs three elements: oxygen, heat, and a combustible matter. But […] in order to get something explosive, one needs Narmino, Husson and the truth. The press being free in Sweden, truth will indeed explode.” Criminal complaint of 7 December 2011 against notably Husson and Narmino (8).”
Moreover, the Swedish Government rightfully rejected HUSSON’s and NARMINO’s attempts to circomnavigate the Swedish Constitution. Indeed, telling the truth is not a crime in Sweden. Only in Monaco, North Korea and similar countries. The UN recently condemned Monaco for its new article 164 of its criminal Code (which forbids criticism against the authorities).
The Kingdom of Sweden celebrates the 250th anniversary of its fundamental Constitution regarding freedom of speech and press.
The same year 2016, Monaco publishes the Swedish consul’s fabricated judgement, refering to article 164, despite the Swedish Government’s official decision.
Through its wanted councillor to the Crown Patricia HUSSON, Monaco blatantly disregards the Swedish Government’s decision which protects BIMCAM not least in 2016, when the Kingdom of Sweden celebrates the 250th anniversary of its fundamental laws (Constitution) regarding freedom of speech and press. Indeed, despite the Swedish Government’s ruling (see topic 15 ) it has published on the World Wide Web a monstrosity of a forgery titled judgement, but omitting the names of Prince Albert and three judges, namely: Cyril BOUSSERON (Goodbye Mister Bousseron!), Patricia HOARAU and Aline BROUSSE.
Within said so called judgement, someone else is falsely credited as the editor in chief and director of publication of BIMCAM. Monaco bases itself on information provided by the Swedish consul and the Swedish police.
Fake judgements, using case laws of foreign countries (France, in this case) and criminally using fake and or illegal relations with yet another country’s police force (Sweden) seems not to be a problem for some weak and / or biased people working at the prosecution office in Sweden, some of which are currently members of the “KLUBB 19”, punishable along the lines of the 3rd paragraph of Sweden’s criminal Code’s 19th chapter, which reads as follows:
“19 kap. Om brott mot rikets säkerhet
3§ Om den, som fått I uppdrag att för riket förhandla med främmande makt eller annars bevaka rikets angelägenheter hos någon som företräder främmande makts intresse, missbrukar behörighet att företräda riket eller annars sin förtroendeställning och därigenom orsakar riket avsevärt men, döms för trolöshet vid förhandling med främmande makt till fängelse på viss tid, lägst två och högst arton år, eller på livstid. Lag 2009:396 (se vid 3:1).”
BIMCAM’s unofficial translation:
”Chapter 19. On crimes against the security of the Kingdom
- 3 If a person, who has been assigned a mission to deal with a foreign power on behalf of the Kingdom or otherwise protect the Kingdom’s concerns with someone who represents the interests of a foreign power, missuses its right to represent the Kingdom or otherwise its position of trust and thereby causes significant damage(s) to the Kingdom, shall be sentenced for breach of trust whilst negociating with a foreign power to emprisonment for a certain period of time, at least two or at most eighten years, or for life. Law 2009:396 (re: 3:1 [in times of war, BIMCAM’s note]).”
This document – which was sent to the Swedish Government – is one of several that Monaco did not dare publish on the internet, opting for yet another public forgery. Well, goodbye mister Loïc MALBRANCKE, and welcome back – after degradation – to the Indian Ocean island of La Réunion! Your testimonials shall be ever so called for, in Sweden. Let’s just hope it won’t need to be done through means of a parliamentary hearing…
Of the people that despite warnings were dragged into this juicy corruption scandal, few remain. MALBRANCKE (former instruction judge, then judge, now ranked lowest within the French hierarchy), prosecutor DRÉNO, ex-chief prosecutor, currently investigated in the international DRÉNO-Affair, Michel ROGER, former judge of the Monegasque Supreme Court, then Minister of State (prime minister), now officially suffering from brain aneurysm… All had to go. And apparently also judge BOUSSERON. As long as Patricia HUSSON remains in power, a safe bet is that many more departures will follow, including in Sweden.
To be continued…
Update of the same day due to new event:
While publishing the present update on this Swedish national day, BIMCAM discovers, on the Association des consuls honoraires à Monaco’s website that Patricia HUSSON considers herself officer of the Order of the Polar Star. Such rank does not exist. For a correct version of the rank, see top of page. The false qualification of officer has this morning been viewed by many another as Patricia HUSSON’s expression of her discontent with the rank that she was given, and that she has remedied to it out of her own volition, granting herself with the more appealing rank of officer.
For all legal intents and purposes.
6 JUNI 2016, 20:21
The President of the Swedish Parliament speaks on live TV to the Royal Family about the glory of Sweden’s 250 year long freedom of speech
To be continued…